Tax Assessment Challenged: Authorities Overreach as Writ Petition Succeeds After Satisfactory Initial Response and Explanation

HC allowed the writ petition challenging the assessment order. After the petitioner's satisfactory response to the initial notice and authorities dropping further proceedings, the subsequent assessment order imposing demands with interest and penalty was quashed. The court found the continued proceedings unsustainable given the earlier acceptance of the petitioner's explanation.

---

---

Issues involved:
The issues involved in this case are related to the challenge against an assessment order dated 29.12.2023, discrepancies in returns filed by the petitioner, issuance of notice in Form ASMT-10, dropping of proceedings by order in Form ASMT-12, and the sustainability of the impugned assessment order.

Discrepancies in Returns and Assessment Order:
The petitioner, engaged in the cash logistics business and registered under GST enactments, received a notice in Form ASMT-10 for assessment year 2017-2018 alleging discrepancies in returns. The petitioner replied to the notice on 22.09.2023, and subsequently, an order in Form ASMT-12 was issued on 27.09.2023 dropping the proceedings after being satisfied with the explanation. The impugned assessment order was issued on 29.12.2023, which the petitioner challenged based on the earlier proceedings and explanations provided.

Contentions of the Petitioner and Respondent:
The petitioner's counsel highlighted that the amounts demanded in the notice in Form ASMT-10 matched with those in the impugned order, emphasizing that the authorities accepted the petitioner's reply and no further action was required. On the other hand, the Government Advocate pointed out a difference between the amounts specified in the notice and those in the impugned assessment order.

Examination of Notices and Assessment Order:
The notice in Form ASMT-10 proposed a demand of Rs. 1,37,33,386.62 for IGST, SGST, and CGST for the financial year 2017-2018. After the petitioner's satisfactory reply, no further action was deemed necessary by the authorities. However, the impugned assessment order confirmed the same demands but included interest and penalty, making it unsustainable after the earlier proceedings concluded no further action was required.

Judgment and Conclusion:
The High Court quashed the impugned assessment order, stating that the continuation of proceedings after the authorities recorded that no further action was needed is unsustainable. The writ petition was allowed, and connected miscellaneous petitions were closed without any order as to costs.

---